CNAME and TTL

2013-12-06 Thread sumsum 2000
Hi, I am having only a forward only option in bind configuration. When i dig on some host which has CNAME, the cache contains a longer TTL for the CNAME than the TTL for the final resolution of the IP. However, in the example below, the CNAME is queried again when the TTL for a336.g.akamai.net

Re: CNAME and TTL

2013-12-06 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
On 06.12.13 15:52, sumsum 2000 wrote: I am having only a forward only option in bind configuration. When i dig on some host which has CNAME, the cache contains a longer TTL for the CNAME than the TTL for the final resolution of the IP. Yes, every record has its own TTL, including every record

Re: dig ignores +notcp when doing IXFR (DiG 9.5.0-P2)

2013-12-06 Thread Chris Thompson
On Dec 5 2013, Matthew Pounsett wrote: On 2013-12-05, at 01:37 , Mark Andrews wrote: Note, named will for the use of TCP in its UDP response. s/for/force/ Always? Regardless of response size? Interesting. What's the rationale for doing it that way? Just to clarify, RFC 1995

Re: dig ignores +notcp when doing IXFR (DiG 9.5.0-P2)

2013-12-06 Thread Matthew Pounsett
On 2013-12-06, at 12:11 , Chris Thompson wrote: > > The sense in which BIND "forces use of TCP" is that when it gets an > IXFR request over UDP, it always just replies with the current SOA. > It doesn't bother to work out whether an incremental transfer is > possible and if so whether it would